Open mike 24/02/2011

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, February 24th, 2011 - 74 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post.

It’s open for discussing topics of interest, making announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

Comment on whatever takes your fancy.

The usual good behaviour rules apply (see the link to Policy in the banner).

Step right up to the mike…

74 comments on “Open mike 24/02/2011 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Pascal's bookie 1
    24 February 2011 at 7:21 am

    I side with the ‘crazy trial’
    people.

  2. Pascal's bookie 2
    24 February 2011 at 7:25 am

    Look here lying leftie scum. Right wing patriots in the United States do not advocate violence, and when they do they are just joking and it’s not serious and they are probably lieberals anyway.

    From my own Twitter account, I confronted the user, JCCentCom. He tweeted back that the demonstrators were “political enemies” and “thugs” who were “physically threatening legally elected officials.” In response to such behavior, he said, “You’re damned right I advocate deadly force.” He later called me a “typical leftist,” adding, “liberals hate police.”

    Only later did we realize that JCCentCom was a deputy attorney general for the state of Indiana.

    http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2011_02/028137.php

  3. Pete 3
    24 February 2011 at 7:33 am

    No Right Turn exposed, following a blog on the National State of Emergency :

    A double fisking for No Right Turn

    Geddis concludes:

    So, like I say – I/S’s posts regrettably are bullshit. I rather fear that he’s fallen victim to exactly the disease he accuses John Key and National of … being so partisan in outlook that everything must have a motive other than the obvious one.

    Sometimes even politicians just want to do the right thing.

    …especially in times of disaster.

    I think that Parker, Key, Goff etc will be taking as much notice of strategists and PR consultants as they will of a few hissy blog posters. They are working to help those in real need.

  4. kriswgtn 4
    24 February 2011 at 8:46 am

    This crap was emailed to me this morning

    These cocks are of the Right

    http://www.christchurchquake.net/

    I cant believe this sort of shit

    Blaming the gays again for the earthquake

    • ianmac 4.1
      24 February 2011 at 10:07 am

      And blaming past PMs as well as the gays kriswgtn. Wonder who these weird people are? Yet freedom of speech does at least allow us to know what some people think, or perhaps believe rather than think. Ha!

      • Lanthanide 4.1.1
        24 February 2011 at 2:05 pm

        I think the point of mentioning Helen Clark and Heather Simpson together is that they like to believe in the fiction that they were duplicitous lesbian lovers out to convert the women of NZ to their wicked ways.

    • Zorr 4.2
      24 February 2011 at 10:15 am

      That site makes me feel physically ill…

      If I ever find out who those fucktards are who have put it together, I will hunt them down and… x_x

    • jimmy 4.3
      24 February 2011 at 10:59 am

      WTF?

      If anyone knows some hackers please direct them to that site.

      • freedom 4.3.1
        24 February 2011 at 2:08 pm

        it is being looked into by a few people, and is now on FaceBook, so they won’t last long ;]

    • Draco T Bastard 4.4
      24 February 2011 at 12:31 pm

      Damn, it doesn’t allow commenting. If it did I’d have a few things to say…

      • Lanthanide 4.4.1
        24 February 2011 at 2:06 pm

        Personally I think it’d better to ignore sites like that. They’re already in a minority with their position to start with, and creating such ridiculous sites isn’t going to sway many people to their cause.

    • mickysavage 4.5
      24 February 2011 at 2:11 pm

      There was also http://bobparkerengineeredthechchquake.blogspot.com/ but at least with that site the guy was taking the piss (I think).

      • Pascal's bookie 4.5.1
        24 February 2011 at 4:03 pm

        Whaleoil got handed an email that’s been sent to elected officials, and is suitably scathing of it:

        http://whaleoil.gotcha.co.nz/2011/02/23/the-sort-of-sentiment-we-dont-need/

        Bomber partially quotes it here:

        http://tumeke.blogspot.com/2011/02/christchurch-earthquake-fault-of.html

        Stay classy god boy

        • Tigger 4.5.1.1
          24 February 2011 at 5:06 pm

          Yep it was me. Had sex in the South Island last year and look at the result.

        • Vicky32 4.5.1.2
          24 February 2011 at 6:06 pm

          I tried to follow all the links, but couldn’t find on the Christian site where they’d actually said what was quoted with a bit of atheist hate-spouting, on Tumeke… It seems as if all the hate flows one way, and it’s not from the Christians but to them. Or is it just that the site would not load properly and would I have found all this hate you’re talking about it if would have?
          Yours sincerely, Puzzled.

          • Carol 4.5.1.2.1
            24 February 2011 at 6:16 pm

            I don’t think all the Christian’s do bigotted hate by any means, but some do.

            Try this. [but warning, don’t view it if you are against nasty, vicous hate-mongering] I believe this is the main source of the quake hatemongering:
            http://www.christchurchquake.net/

            and this: [same warning as above – includes anti-lesbian, Helen Clark is an evil dyke stuff]
            http://www.christchurchquake.net/html/payBackSept11.html

            PS: I’m not sure abiout the wisdom of publishing these links. Don’t mind if they are removed once Deb has seen the evidence.

            • Vicky32 4.5.1.2.1.1
              24 February 2011 at 6:52 pm

              Thanks Carol, I’ll try those and hope they load! (On my previous try, only Tumeke would, and I was stunned by his hate-speech, which I have previously only seen on dedicated atheist sites such as Dawkins.net etc. (I used to be signed up there, believe it or not.) I have to say the American atheist sites are much worse than Dawkins, who at least has moderators who moderate!
              Hate from either side depresses me greatly…
              Ah, the second link has loaded and it blows my mind! Unbelievable… Oh my giddy aunt. What would they make of the fact that it happened on the birthday of my sister who works in a bar in Welly, and also for the Prostitutes Collective? Those idiots don’t even realise that Christchurch was named after the town in England, not because the founders were evangelical zealots!
              Deb

          • Pascal's bookie 4.5.1.2.2
            24 February 2011 at 8:02 pm

            Dear puzzled,

            On both whaleoil’s site (himself a christian), and on Tumeke there is an email quoted. That the email isn’t on the Christian pastor’s website is hardly surprising, it is an email afterall.

            The email speaks for itself I should think, but I would be more than happy to discuss the theology of it if you are still confused.

            Kindest regards,
            bookie.

            • Vicky32 4.5.1.2.2.1
              24 February 2011 at 8:35 pm

              It’s sorted PB… Carol gave me other links, and I checked the site out. It made me feel ill!
              Did you not read what I replied to her?
              Deb

              • Pascal's bookie …
                24 February 2011 at 8:48 pm

                Yep. I just wondered why you wrote what you wrote after (presumably) reading the email on tumeke, which is different from the other site.

                I honestly don’t want to have big fight about it*, but you did play the victim card, which seemed to me, (and I’ll happily accept that I’m wrong about this), to be either defending the content of that email or disputing it’s veracity. I don’t have any evidence that the email is legit of course, but it is hardly uncommon stuff from that wing of the Christian church. Unfortunately the broader church doesn’t do much to counter that sort of rhetoric, they seem to rate intra-christian fellowship higher than, well, opposing that sort of thing.

                *I’m prepared to if you’d like though.

                • Vicky32 …
                  24 February 2011 at 9:00 pm

                  “*I’m prepared to if you’d like though.”
                  Of course you are!
                  But sadly for you, I won’t play your reindeer game. As I said before, the only link that would load was Tumeke, and then, only partially, and I saw his spiteful sweary Dawkins type rant, but only the first few words of the email.
                  Carol gave me links that worked.
                  I was not ‘playing the victim card” you ass, I was saying that I literally couldn’t see the email!
                  Stuff your snide sneers. What you call the ‘broader church’ has better things to do than giving creeps like that the oxygen of publicity. Like helping people – but are you one of the angry men who hates the Salvation Army because of what they said 30 years ago? I can’t keep up with y’all!
                  If the Standard has become yet another atheist site, I am going to have to limit my involvement – I have wasted far too many heartbeats trying to reason with bigotry over the last few years.

                  • Pascal's bookie …
                    24 February 2011 at 9:25 pm

                    Here is what you said:

                    I tried to follow all the links, but couldn’t find on the Christian site where they’d actually said what was quoted with a bit of atheist hate-spouting, on Tumeke… It seems as if all the hate flows one way, and it’s not from the Christians but to them. Or is it just that the site would not load properly and would I have found all this hate you’re talking about it if would have?
                    Yours sincerely, Puzzled.

                    From that, I had the impression that you had seen what was quoted on Tumeke. I got that impression because you said you couldn’t find the quote on the Christian site.

                    Had I known that you had launched into the ‘evil atheists are attacking christians’ routine based on not knowing anything about what was being talked about, I could easily have got the quote for you. But you didn’t ask. Instead you gave the impression that you had seen the quote.

                    My bad, sorry for being an atheist.

                    • Vicky32 …
                      24 February 2011 at 11:59 pm

                      As my sister used to say “Oh dear, how sad, never mind”… Youse guys are nothing if not predictable!
                      I am not responsible for your misunderstanding me, which by the way, you have, big-time.
                      I didn’t see the moronic email. But Carol gave me working links to the site, and I saw what they are. No war necessary, so why do you want to start one? So *you* can feel like the victim? Poor diddums, ain’t gonna happen. I am outta here.

                  • Pascal's bookie …
                    24 February 2011 at 9:28 pm

                    And as for snide sneers, there is something, in a book I’m quite familiar with, about motes and eyes.

                    • jimmy …
                      25 February 2011 at 8:24 am

                      That was a mountain of a mole hill there P.B.

                    • Pascal's bookie …
                      25 February 2011 at 8:41 am

                      I agree, but this:

                      I tried to follow all the links, but couldn’t find on the Christian site where they’d actually said what was quoted with a bit of atheist hate-spouting, on Tumeke… It seems as if all the hate flows one way, and it’s not from the Christians but to them.

                      and this

                      (On my previous try, only Tumeke would, and I was stunned by his hate-speech, which I have previously only seen on dedicated atheist sites such as Dawkins.net etc. (I used to be signed up there, believe it or not.) I have to say the American atheist sites are much worse than Dawkins, who at least has moderators who moderate!

                      did most of the building of it IMHO. Vicky admits that she hasn’t seen what Tumeke was responding to (and still seems to think it was the other completely seperate thing that Carol linked to) and yet still went into high dudgeon about mean old ‘atheist hate speech’.

                      I questioned her on that, believing she had seen the email, (because she initially implied she had seen it and gone looking (unsuccessfully) for the quote on the Christian website).

                      I read that as saying that my linking to the website of the author of the email was somehow wrong or unfair. That I was smearing the website and by extention Christianity. I genuinely think that my comments, while snarky, are fair enough.

                      But I agree that it’s a mountain from a molehill, but stand by what I’ve said, none of which I think is unfair.

                    • jimmy …
                      25 February 2011 at 9:15 am

                      Once the info channels were sorted Vicky made it abundantly clear that she didnt agree with the site, particularaly at 4.5.1.2.2.1 with “it made me feel ill”

                      Didnt really need to any further than that.

                    • Pascal's bookie …
                      25 February 2011 at 9:32 am

                      jimmy, that’s fine, but…

                      I never mentioned that site. I was talking about a completely different email in the comment she responded to. (4.5.1)

                      In her response she insinuated that bomber, or I, was being dishonest and tarring a chritsian web site, and using hate speech against christianity.

                      All I’ve being doing is saying, ‘not so’. Bomber was inflammatory, but his rhetoric had context and was targetted against an individual minister, not christianity.

                      But I’ll drop it now.

  5. G8 5
    24 February 2011 at 9:31 am

    Below came through to our firm on Tuesday.

    Good morning,

    We have completed an inquiry into the Counties Manukau Pacific Trust providing free advertising space on a billboard to Len Brown during the Auckland mayoral campaign in 2010.

    Overall, we do not regard the matter as showing a significant lapse of judgement or lack of probity by the Trust. There was no cost to the Trust or to Manukau City Council ratepayers.

    The full content of our reply is available on our website:

    http://www.oag.govt.nz/whats-new/2011/counties-manukau-pacific-trust

    Will Rodney Hyde and Jamie-Lee Ross refund the tax payers the cost of the investigation which was just political grandstanding?

  6. Pascal's bookie 6
    24 February 2011 at 9:53 am

    hey vto,

    if you read this, speak up.

    • lprent 6.1
      24 February 2011 at 10:01 am

      Yeah I’m getting a bit worried as well. I just hope it is a power problem rather than anything more serious.

      As far as I can see most of the other regulars from around Christchurch have commented.

      • Lanthanide 6.1.1
        24 February 2011 at 2:17 pm

        I think it’s probably lack of electricity for vto. I don’t know where he is, but these comments on Open Mike from the 4th indicate it’s in the eastern suburbs (Brighton) which still have no power:

        “shit, have had to escape two tsunamis and now this earthquake in the last twelve months. That’s enough for us.”

        “One advantage of being on the more broke side of the ledger in recent times is that we have not been able to move into a proper sized better house with all the mod cons and solid plaster this and that – as such our long-owned and much loved tiny old wooden cottage just bounced and jostled and jumbled and danced on its dodgy stone and brick piles, along with the pansies in the window box, but no damage. I would suspect we are in the small minority – the majority of people around us and friends and family have damage to their homes and businesses.”

  7. Pascal's bookie 7
    24 February 2011 at 10:38 am

    Get this sorted, elected officials.

    Wellington City Council requires any building built before 1976 to be strengthened to a third of the current standard within 20 years if it may contain, or risk damaging, crowds of people. A previously tighter timetable was pushed out to 20 years in 2009 after building owners complained about the costs. Former mayor Kerry Prendergast urged the council to revisit the issue “with a view to tightening the deadlines again” after the September quake.

    Auckland Council building policy manager Bob de Leur said all previous councils in the Auckland region had only passive policies requiring strengthening when new building consents were sought. The new combined council is expected to review that policy this year. Home Owners and Buyers Association president John Gray said virtually all “leaky buildings” had been found to have structural defects as well as leaks.

    But he said a Building Amendment Bill now before Parliament would weaken controls even further by removing an existing requirement for consent authorities to physically inspect new buildings before issuing code compliance certificates – now to be called “consent completion certificates”.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10708327

    hattip to Stephen Judd over at PAS.

    • Draco T Bastard 7.1
      24 February 2011 at 12:29 pm

      But he said a Building Amendment Bill now before Parliament would weaken controls even further by removing an existing requirement for consent authorities to physically inspect new buildings before issuing code compliance certificates – now to be called “consent completion certificates”.

      NACT making the community even more vulnerable to avoidable risk.

  8. weka 8
    24 February 2011 at 11:32 am

    Does anyone know what’s happened in the area of the Christchurch Art Gallery? I’m trying to find out about a friend who lives and works in those blocks. Has the area been evacuated? Are there buildings collapsed there?

    I’ve had a look at this map http://maps.google.co.nz/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=205972314722231895961.00049cd3bc095df8c4355&ll=-43.516689,172.629547&spn=0.348556,0.583649&z=10&source=embed and it says the Arts Centre has been badly damaged. Is there any more information anywhere yet?

    • Lanthanide 8.1
      24 February 2011 at 2:19 pm

      The Art Gallery itself was purpose-built as a civil defense headquarters. If they were in the building at the time, they are most likely fine.

      The Arts Center however, being old stone buildings, has had substantial damage.

      • kriswgtn 8.1.1
        24 February 2011 at 2:38 pm

        That is sad to hear re Arts Centre.I went many years ago to Rocky Horror @ that ind Cinema
        Amazing architecture

  9. ianmac 9
    24 February 2011 at 12:10 pm

    My sister and brother in law were in the McDougal Art Gallery as the quake hit. This is a block from the Art Gallery and across from the Art Centre. They walked out of the gallery, comforted tourists but reported no damage. ( No buses but a stranger crammed four into the back of a very small car and ran them out to Bryndwr.) The damage to the upper part of the Art Centre is serious. There have been no reports of damage to the Art Gallery/ Civil Defence Centre. Many of the TV interviews were outside the Art Gallery.

  10. Jum 10
    24 February 2011 at 12:26 pm

    What does this mean?

    http://sticknz.net/2011/02/23/angel-association-comes-out-with-some-new-years-revolutions/

    Especially this part:

    ‘His thought piece says that the government should require institutional funds like ACC and NZ Super to allocate capital to the growth economy.
    “I cringe as a write this, as any investment should ride or fall on the results it delivers,” he says. “The reality is, however, that the sector is immature in New Zealand and requires a long term commitment to the development of capability. These institutions have significant experience in the selection and oversight of fund managers and can bring capital, process and experience to the table.”

    • Draco T Bastard 10.1
      24 February 2011 at 12:45 pm

      It means that someone else is planning to get their hands on our money.

      • Jum 10.1.1
        24 February 2011 at 1:00 pm

        Yes, and it ties in with the overarching belief in rightwing quarters that while they hate big government, they expect funding to support their losses/projects. The public loss, private profit equation. They also hate ‘government’ supporting those vulnerable people.

        What annoyed me was the “I cringe…” Yet he admits that the ‘institutions’ have the knowhow, but forgets the ACC and the NZ Super, e.g. are us. The government is ‘us’. That ‘us’ includes the majority of beneficiaries, unfortunately in peril at present but having paid tax at some time in their lives.

        It’s obvious that if ‘he’ gets the capital he wants from ‘us’, he’s not going to respect ‘us’ in the morning is he.

  11. weka 11
    24 February 2011 at 12:35 pm

    thanks ianmac 🙂

  12. kriswgtn 12
    24 February 2011 at 12:59 pm

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/4698996/Veitch-owed-an-apology-police-told

    like hell

    or maybe Key will wanna do it cos theyre so close 😛

  13. Tiger Mountain 13
    24 February 2011 at 1:02 pm

    IPCA recommends apology be tendered to back busting, breakdown faking, (unless self pity is now an illness) misogynist broadcaster Tony Vietch.

    Unbelievable in a moral sense, though no doubt various legal technicalities will employed to justify the stance.

    • ianmac 13.1
      24 February 2011 at 2:32 pm

      The bigger picture here might be that if you are accused (not charged) of a number of crimes and there is wide public interest, and the police publish the accusations then you stand a good chance of being pilloried and reviled for some things that you may or may not have ever done. So putting Veitch aside, consider yourself being in such a position. A bad case of being found guilty until proven innocent.
      Goeorge Smith (fictitious) 25, reporter for the Times, was arrested for driving while under the influence. He was also accused of pissing on a policeman, manhandling a little girl, punching an elderly woman, and selling drugs. When he appeared in court he was charged and convicted for driving while under the influence. No other charges were laid and no other evidence was forth coming. An angry crowd outside shouted obcenities and ……..

      • mcflock 13.1.1
        24 February 2011 at 6:05 pm

        I think there’s a difference between maliciously-fabricated charges and good faith charges, but I agree that there should have been the promised consultation.

        I would suggest that Veitch might approve this as an apology:

        Dear Tony,
        This week it has been reported in the media that the IPCA have made an announcement concerning an incident that occurred some time ago. We deeply regret what happened.

        Although we disagree with some interpretations of this report in the media, we make no excuses for our behaviour. The officer in question was under a great deal of strain and made an error, but we make no excuses for our behaviour. We deeply regret not consulting with you about the officer’s decision to release documents to the media, and accept that the fact he was overworked is no excuse. But he was.

        We accept that the police have no role in balancing media coverage. We just got really emotional and frustrated with your PR firm attacking your victim in the media and lashed out. But we make no excuses. It was an error to release information like suggestions you broke your partner’s back. We deeply regret any embarrassment this caused, and have since the day it happened. We didn’t make an apology earlier because we were only thinking of you, and had no desire to put you through further distress.

        Following the incident we undertook weekly counselling for a year, counselling which enabled us to form relationships we now have with other men who “lash out” at their partners. Indeed, we tell them what had happened shortly after we start seeing each other. They have been completely supportive and we are grateful beyond words for that support. Gosh we’re lucky, and actually really nice. I patted a dog once. Gave lollies to a baby. God blesses the Police. Oh, that’s right, it’s not all about us. Sorry, bro. Now we’ve apologised, we’re cool, right?

        • ianmac 13.1.1.1
          24 February 2011 at 7:53 pm

          Mcflock: I think that the point is not really about Veitch. You clearly have formed an intense dislike for him I perhaps largely formed from the media reports fed by the police.

          But I am not arguing the rights and wrongs of Veitch. I do not really know enough about what happened. It is just the rights of an individual, perhaps you or me, need to be protected from information or misinformation published before charges are laid which might severely prejudice my right to a fair trial. Guilty before innocence.
          Remember also that the IPCA are not very likely to make lightly a judgement against the police.

          And of course I am totally opposed to bullies using violence against those who are vulnerable.

          • McFlock 13.1.1.1.1
            24 February 2011 at 9:49 pm

            It doesn’t just highlight the issue of privacy – it also highlights the lack of justice when guilty pleas are made by arrangement on some charges so a full trial doesn’t have to go ahead. The justice of procedural expedience.

            I actually agree with you, but also feel that this particular case is very much in the grey area. As all the most interesting cases are 🙂

            • ianmac 13.1.1.1.1.1
              24 February 2011 at 10:53 pm

              You might be right but if Veitch was not part of the issue how should we respond? 🙂

              • McFlock …
                25 February 2011 at 12:50 am

                Like I say, in principle I agree with you. But then of course the only reason for the police to release information additional to what they would have done was the media circus – I don’t believe too many other partner-violence cases get the same treatment in the media.

                The issue of additional information releases prior to court is intimately tied up with celebrity status and media management. The only other NZ case I can recall which comes close (i.e. police releasing personal information regarding current cases or similar) was ISTR a police officer was alleged to or disciplined for giving information to his wife regarding a convicted sex offender moving into their local community and she distributed leaflets with the data. Again, an action that I think was wrong.

                I would just find it poetic if the police gave a similar apology to Veitch as he made at his press conference.

            • ianmac 13.1.1.1.1.2
              24 February 2011 at 10:56 pm

              And methinks the dropping of some charges (in this case never laid) in exchange for a guilty plea to others is another issue all together. Sounds like the American system? 🙁

              • McFlock …
                25 February 2011 at 1:16 am

                Charges were laid, but the crown offered evidence on only one of them. To which he pleaded guilty. His lawyer’s perspective and the other side. The young “Old Faithful” Wikipedia is reasonably evenhanded.

                On the upside such arrangements speed up the system and save painful trials. On the downside it means that officially the criminal never did those other things that got put by the wayside. Usually it’s only semantics, though.

        • Pascal's bookie 13.1.1.2
          24 February 2011 at 8:12 pm

          I think Tony could have no complaints with such an apology mcflock.

          This is an interesting thread, in which Mike Williams picks at a scab.

          http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/police-told-say-sorry-tony-veitch-nk-86838

  14. todd 14
    24 February 2011 at 3:39 pm

    An open letter to the Green Party:

    http://thejackalman.blogspot.com/2011/02/open-letter-to-green-party.html

    Firstly let me thank you on behalf of all unemployed people for being the only party that stands up for the little guy. I am very appreciative of the fact that the Green Party thoroughly understands the issues and is prepared to do something about the apparent war on our welfare state…

  15. Fisiani 15
    24 February 2011 at 4:00 pm

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/4694800/Christchurch-quake-cost-up-to-8b-PM

    Phil still has not explained how he will fund his 15 billion dollar promises to date (5 billion a year for a three year term)
    Now that we will be stung with another unexpected $8billion bill will he renege on his already unaffordable $10 a week aspirational tax promise and envy tax?

    • Marty G 15.1
      24 February 2011 at 4:20 pm

      actually, the $8 billion bill is mostly insured. the government will need a billion or two though

      won’t we need to keep the tax and get rid of the cut?

      or do you expect $2 billion to appear by magic?

    • Lanthanide 15.2
      24 February 2011 at 4:23 pm

      If we want to talk about irresponsible politicians and what they’re going to do in response to the quake; will John Key renege on his already unaffordable “tax switch”?

      • Fisiani 15.2.1
        24 February 2011 at 5:14 pm

        The wonderful tax switch cost nothing. That’s what fiscally neutral means…….duh.

        • Lanthanide 15.2.1.1
          24 February 2011 at 7:06 pm

          The ‘tax switch’ was only fiscally neutral if you believe the fudged (most optimistic) numbers they put out that showed $1bn of increased economic growth due to the tax cuts as well as tax avoidance claw backs that they expected to make.

          The actual hard maths of the revenue reduction from the income tax cuts compared against the revenue increase from GST shows a large negative hole.

          As the economic growth has not occurred so far, and the CHCH earthquake makes this even less likely to happen in the time frames provided, the tax cuts are definitely NOT going to be fiscally neutral.

          If you believe they are, then you’re effectively holding your hands over your ears and saying “nyah nyah nyah I can’t hear you” and denying reality.

        • Draco T Bastard 15.2.1.2
          24 February 2011 at 7:07 pm

          Accept that it wasn’t fiscally neutral as you well know (we’re borrowing $120m/week to pay for it) which means that you’re lying.

    • KJT 16.1
      24 February 2011 at 6:40 pm

      People forget that Chambers of commerce, Federated farmers, Employers and manufacturers, The medical association, The Law society, Real estate agents, New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants (NZICA), are also unions. They have been much more successful in getting extra pay, improved conditions, closed shops and taxpayer subsidies for their members than even the most militant blue collar union.

      That is before you even consider cartels and monopolies like supermarkets, banks and oil companies.

      The big success of Kiwi bank is breaking the collusive excessive pricing of the big banks.

      • Colonial Viper 16.1.1
        24 February 2011 at 9:21 pm

        Excessive pricing of the big banks? Hmmm still not busted enough I think. Last I heard Westpac made $6M per week profit in the year to September, and ANZ more than double that.

        Money taken out of our economy, moved to Australia, helping to raise the living standards of Australian shareholders.

  17. felix 17
    24 February 2011 at 7:54 pm

    Oh look, more right-wing terrorist threats:
    http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2011/02/23/a-call-for-armed-counterprotesters-to-atlanta-labor-rally/

    Still I’m sure those on the left are just as bad, it’s just what with them being so darn sneaky we never get to see it…

  18. Colonial Viper 18
    24 February 2011 at 9:44 pm

    Governmental Representatives of the People Hiding and Running

    Where? Bahrain? Libya? Nope, the US of A. Trying to prevent union busting laws from being passed in multiple states.

    CHICAGO — By now, Jon Erpenbach, one of 14 Democratic state senators on the run from Wisconsin, has switched hotels in this city three times, a necessity, he says, as word kept slipping out about where he was staying.

    At first it was unsettling: the essentials were forgotten — extra slacks, socks, even underwear — in a last-minute race to get south of the state line. But gradually the lawmakers restocked, thanks to packages delivered by family members and trips to discount stores.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/24/us/politics/24exiles.html?hp

  19. ianmac 19
    24 February 2011 at 11:02 pm

    And here was I believing that Democracy was a cornerstone of USA. Justice. Freedom.Democracy. Why else export it to Iraq or Afghanistan or block it in Palestine?

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.